get_console_logs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't mention critical aspects like whether it requires an active browser connection (implied by siblings like 'connect_to_browser'), potential performance impacts, or error handling, leaving significant gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence in Russian that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (retrieving browser logs with 3 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral traits, usage context, or return values, which are essential for effective tool selection and invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 without compensating value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Получить логи консоли браузера' clearly states the verb ('получить' - get) and resource ('логи консоли браузера' - browser console logs), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_html' or 'get_text' that also retrieve browser content, missing explicit distinction.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_html' and 'get_text' that retrieve different browser data, there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage ambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.